Introduction to Technical Communicaton - Research Paper Example

Introduction to Technical Communication Introduction to Technical Communication Part Proofreading I chose to proofread a document entitled “Making Marijuana Illegal.”Making Marijuana IllegalThe etymology of the word marijuana came form two words “Maria” which means Mary and “Juana,” which means Joan. The plant originated form Mexican Spanish before it spread to other countries. Other names for this drug include grass, dope, hooch, weed, ganga, green and others. The drug is produced form a plant called cannabis sativa that grows wild in many parts of the tropical and temperate parts of the world.

For many decades now, human beings have used the plant for fibre, seed oil, medical treatment, or for fun. Apparently, the plant contains over 400 chemicals that can serve recreational or therapeutic purposes. The big question is whether we really need to make the drug illegal.Extent of dug usageThe major reason for usage of this drug is that it causes a change on how one thinks and perceives the environment. That is, the drug has in it delta-9 tetra hydro-cannabinol (THC) an ingredient that results in relaxation, and a mild euphoria.

Statistics reveal an increase in the usage of the drug especially by the teenage. A study involving Mexican high school students revealed that 3.5% of surveyed students confessed to be involved in some drug trafficking. In addition, a report by National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) revealed an increase on usage by the eighth graders form 14.5% to 16 %. In addition, 12 graders have declined the use of cigarettes, taken up use of marijuana. In the same survey, it emerged that at least 21.

4% of the high school students have taken up marijuana in the last 30 days (NIDA web).Proofreading Comments:The document entitled “Making Marijuana Illegal” makes excessive use of passive voices, spelling mistakes, punctuation marks, which makes it dull and difficult to follow. The wrong usage of verbs distorts meaning in certain sentences, which makes them unintelligible. The document also features various aspects of wordiness and long sentences. Long sentences have the effect of reducing the aesthetics of the writing.

Interplay of long and short sentences usually improves the quality of the writing. Punctuation also features as a major technical factor to the document. Missing comas and wrong use of other elements of punctuation also distort the quality of the work. Repetition of certain words affects the quality of the work. The document also features various wrongly structured sentences. Generally, poorly structured sentences fail to connect appropriately with the intended meaning of the article. The various technical faults of the article weaken the thesis of the argument and deny it the necessary aspect of objectivity.

Part 2Comparison between the two documentsThe summarized version is more concise and precise in details and information than the longer version, which contains multiple details that seem to be confusing. Further, the summary is more objective and specific as compared to the longer text. All the information contained in the longer text are compressed in an effective manner that supplies meaning with ease. It is possible for a reader to obtain easy information by glancing at the figures that are contained in the document.

The use of shorter sentences in the summary improves the readability of the document. It is easy for readers to connect the meaning of the sentences easily as compared to the longer text that contains a lot of information. The use of shorter sentences has the effect of improving the general quality of the text. In a significant sense, the summary form of the document is more user-friendly when compared to the longer version. The tabulation of various percentages in the summarized text complements the information provided in the writing.

The two documents also differ significantly in relation to the choice of vocabulary. The longer document is rendered in vocabulary that is more complex and is rather rigid in meaning as compared to the shorter document. On this score, it becomes easier for the reader to understand the details contained in the summary, which is provided in a more direct language using simpler vocabulary. On this account, the choice of vocabulary could serve a misleading purpose that will confound rather than inform the reader.

The choice of vocabulary usually determines the kind of readers. Complex vocabulary can contribute to loss of meaning since many average readers may lack the grasp of the meanings of some of the words used in the document (Nielsen, 1997b). Moreover, such words may require more time and concentration for effective comprehension. The summary would be more attractive to more readers as compared to the longer document. The technical aspects of any writings often determine the aspects of readability and memorization of any document (Bombardó, Aguilar, & Barahona, 2008).

Brief sentences usually enhance the aspects of objectivity and clarity in any piece of writing. Brevity equally contributes to the creation of meaning since it condenses all the major facts and information in a precise and orderly manner. Good pieces of writing usually match the technical aspects with the kind of information offered by the article (Byrne, 2006). Certain forms of information require to be packaged in a different form of information in order to enhance on the meaning in ways that are representative of the author’s intention.

Appropriate use of punctuation usually improves the precision of any piece of writing in ways that capture the central issues of the text.ReferencesBombardó, S. C., Aguilar, P. M., & Barahona, F. C. (2008). Technical writing: A guide for effective communication. Barcelona: Edicions UPC.Byrne, J. (2006). Technical translation: Usability strategies for translating technical documentation. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Nielsen, J. (1997). Concise, Scannable, and Objective: How to Write for the Web. Useit.com.

Retrieved http://www.nngroup.com/articles/concise-scannable-and-objective-how-to-write-for-the-web/ (a)Nielsen, J. (1997). How Users Read on the Web. Useit.com. Retrieved http://www.nngroup.com/articles/how-users-read-on-the-web/ (b)